(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "The economy of Surry County : Elkin, Dobson, Pilot Mountain"

C4- 



North Carolina State Library 
Raleigh 



THE ECONOMY OF SURRY COUNTY 

ELKIN • DOBSON • PILOT MOUNTAIN 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2010 with funding from 
State Library of North Carolina 



http://www.archive.org/details/economyofsurrycoOOnort 



THE ECONOMY OF SURRY COUNTY 

ELKIN • DOBSON • PILOT MOUNTAIN 



I 



DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 
DIVISION OF COMMUNITY PLANNING 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

Robert D. Barbour, Administrator 
John H, Voorhees, Assistant Administrator 

WESTERN PIEDMONT PLANNING OFFICE 



P r epar ed for; 

SURRY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 

and the towns of 

Dobson 

Elkin 

Pilot Mountai n 



SURRY COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 

W . Howa rd Ha r dy 

Buck White 

Marion C. Whitener 



SURRY COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 

Kester A. Sink, Chairman 

Charles C. Jackson, Secretary 

Robe r t S . Bur rus 

Tom F . Cooley 

Ea rlie Gilley 

Tom Lewi s 

Randal 1 Reeves 

Howard Scott 

Howard 0. Woltz 



Gary M. Cooper, Chief Area Planner 
♦Josef H. Perry, Research Planner 
Glenda Yarbrough, Secretary 
Jackie Skipper, Draftsman 
Gay Brantley, Cover Design 

♦Responsible for this report 



February 1963 -- Price $1.00 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



1 Summary and Conclusions 

2 I n t r oduc 1 1 on 

3 The Economy of Surry County 

4 The Labor Force 

8 Major Economic Commitments 

14 Analysis of the Economy 

20 Style of Life in Surry County 
20 I ncorae 

22 Educa t i on 

23 Hous i ng 

24 Interrelationships 

29 Population Trends in Surry County 
31 Population Projections 

A-F Appendi c es 



SURRY COUNTY IN ITS REGIONAL SETTING 




MAP I 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 



ry County has a mixed economy with specializations 
reduction of textile, agricultural, furniture, 

and stone products. Employment gains of 2,831 
from 1950 to 1960 came from jobs for women (up 
0.7%), while losses in farm and furniture Jobs 
et gain of only 172 (1.4%) for men, Surry in- 

have fared well competitively, but the long-run 
g or slow-growth character of the major industries 

1970 employment projections of very little in- 
gains in commercial and professional services and 
ndustry balancing losses in agriculture, textiles, 
i tur e . 



Surry County is slightly below overall State levels 
of income, education, and housing, but:two out of five 
families in 1959 subsisted on less than $3,000; half of 
all housing units in 1960 were classified 'substandard'; 
one out of six adults in 1960 lacked even a fifth-grade 
educa t i on . 



Sur 


In the p 


apparel , 


(17.2%) 


2 ,659--6 


left a n 


dustries 


declinin 


leads to 


crease, 


in new i: 


and furn 




Because of heavy outmigration (more than 5,500 persons 
in the past decade, most of them young adults), the popu- 
lation is increasing slowly, and a gain of only 4.3% is 
projected for the County by 1980. 

Good planning can help reverse the trends and create 
economic growth, but closest attention should be paid to 
upgrading the quality of Surry County's style of live 
(income, education, and housing). 



INTRODUCTION 



of S 

Pilo 

r ele 

anal 

whic 

and 

home 

prog 

thes 

due t 

depe 

ana 1 

pred 

that 

deve 

for 

mini 

happ 

indi 



This p 
ur r y Co 
t Mount 
van t f o 
y s i s , w 
h to wo 
attract 
s , scho 
e ny , wi 
e wi she 
ion and 
nds . G 
y s i s of 
ic t i ons 

past a 
lopment 
growth 
mi zing 
ens in 
vi dua 1 



lann 
unty 
ain 
r f u 
hen 
r k a 
i ve 
o 1 s i 
11 b 
s wi 

exc 
ener 

r ec 
) in 
nd p 

s t r 
and 
eff e 
the 
and 



ing 

and 
is a 
tur e 
peop 
nd 1 
envi 

chu 
e pr 
11 a 
hang 
ally 
ent 
tot 
r ese 
ateg 
bett 
c t s 
futu 
coll 



report 
the t 
n eva 1 
local 
le hav 
i ve , t 
r onmen 
r ches , 
ot ec t e 
1 1 rac t 
e ac t i 
, the 
ec onom 
he f ut 
nt t r e 
y invo 
erment 
of dec 
re is 
ec t i ve 



, f o 
owns 
uati 

p la 
e a 
hey 
t wh 

s t o 
d. 

peo 
vi t i 
r epo 
ic d 
ur e 
nds 
Ives 

of 
line 
up t 

res 



r th 

of 
on o 
nni n 
Choi 
look 
er e 
res, 
An e 
pie, 
es u 
i«t i 
a ta , 
base 
will 

enh 
1 i vi 

and 
o lo 
pons 



e p lanni 
Dobson , 
f econom 
g. In t 
c e of a 

for a w 
their in 

f ac t or i 
nvi ronme 

as well 
pon whic 
s a s t ra 

wi th pr 
d on the 

c on t i nu 
anc ement 
n g stand 

decay . 
ca 1 c i t i 
e s to ch 



ng b 
Elki 
ic t 
he f 
p lac 
ell- 
vest 
es , 
n t w 

a s 
h th 
ight 
o jec 

ass 
e . 

of 
ar ds 

Wha 
zens 
alle 



n , a 
rend 
i na 1 
e in 
orga 
men t 
and 
hich 
the 
e ec 
f or w 
t i on 
ump t 
Loca 
t r en 

whi 
t ac 

i n 
nges 



in 
thei r 

meets 
pr o- 
onomy 
ar d 

s (not 
i on 
1 

ds 
le 

tually 
their 

ahead , 



Available in this report for the first time are 
previously unpublished data from the 1960 U. S. Census 
for the townships of Surry County . In addition, 
privately financed cross- tabulat i ons of income, educa- 
tion, occupation, and housing data for the County are 
included. Some other data, for the basic economic 
analysis of the County, were first published last year 
is a similar planning report for the Town of Mount Airy 



THE ECONOMY OF SURRY COUNTY 



The Economic Setting ; 

Surry is located In the northwest corner of North 
Carolina's industrial Piedmont. Traditionally it is in 
the heart of the Old Belt Brlghtleaf Tobacco Economic 
Subregion, but today it is an industrial county of rural 
residents. Surry's manufacturing firms employ ten thousand 
workers, eight thousand of them in textiles and apparel; 
two thousand workers commute in from adjacent counties to 
Jobs in Elkin, Mount Airy, and Pilot Mountain; and three- 
quarters of the Surry employees are rural residents. 

From its early settlement until mid-nineteenth century 
Surry County had a subsistence, frontier economy, largely 
because the mountain barrier to the north and west and the 
broken topography across the county prevented early devel- 
opment of commerce with other areas. The self-sufficiency 
of early residents led to establishment of industries based 
on local raw materials and locally developed crafts. In 
1840 Jacob Brower opened a cotton and woolen mill at Mount 
Airy, and in 1848 the Elkin Manufacturing Company began 
producing high-grade cotton sheeting. By the time the 
Chatham Manufacturing Company opened In 1877, Surry County 
had a significant commitment to Industry. Other cotton mills, 
tobacco factories, and producers of shoes, wagons, cabinets, 
saddles, and c lo thi ng--wer e in Surry by 1880. The area's 
dominant agriculture specialized in tobacco, and twenty-one 
plants were processing tobacco in 1893, when the panic and 
control of national markets by monopolistic trusts wiped out 
the county's tobacco processors. This loss was offset by 
the rapid expansion of furniture, opening of railroads to 
Mount Airy and Elkin, and exploitation of granite resources. 

From these traditions of local development of industry, 
Surry industry has to the present been typified by local 
ownership and management of industries along traditional 
lines of textiles, furniture, and stone products. Attraction 
of outside industry is a very recent development. 



The Surry County Labor Force : 

The key to economic growth for any area is in provision 
of jobs for men. During the 1950-60 decade, an increase of 
about ten percent in jobs for men was necessary to accommodate 
natural increase in heads of households and other male entrants 
into the labor force. In the State, overall employment 
increased by 9.8%, yet over a third of a million persons 
migrated out primarily for a lack of sufficient employment. 
Broken down by sex, State data indicate an absolute loss in 
Jobs for males, while female employment increased by 34.7%. 
Table 1 shows employment changes by sex for major industry 
categories in Surry County, 1940-60. 



decad 
gr owt 
( 1940 
in ag 
in f u 
ba r e 1 
Surry 
f ac to 
that 
sixty 
as fa 
empl o 
and c 
The S 
unemp 
unemp 
the u 
those 
into 
age . 
dur in 
avera 



Employment incr 
e s may appear t 
h for the Count 
-50) and only 1 
ricultural empl 
rni tur e and app 
y c over ed the 1 

women moved f r 
ries and office 
they ga i ned 2 , 6 

percent increa 
mi 1 i es leavi ng 
yment i n loca 1 
o s t -r educ t i on m 
urry-Yadkin lab 
loymen t for sev 
loyed have been 
nemployed have 
■ of lower skill 
j obs of greater 

And then more 
g the pa s t deca 
ge potent ia 1 in 



ea s es 
o deno 
y , but 
72 (19 
oy men t 
a r e 1 ; 
osses . 
om hou 
s to a 
59 in 
se. U 
unecon 
i ndus t 
oves h 
o r ma r 
e ra 1 y 

under 
been u 

and e 

deman 
t han 5 
de , mo 

educa 



of 3,31 
t e rapi 

for ma 
50-60) . 

for ma 
gai ns i 
Folio 
s ewo r k 
dd to f 
emp 1 oym 
nemp loy 
omi ca 1 
ries at 
a ve 1 ed 
ke t are 
ears no 

age f o 
nski 1 le 
ducat i o 
d in t h 
,500 pe 
st of t 
t i on , s 



2 and 
d and 
les t 
The 
les a 
n o th 
wing 
and u 
ami ly 
ent i 
men t 
farm 
the 
to s 
a has 
w. T 
rty-f 
d or 
nal 1 
is in 
r s on s 
hem y 
kill , 



2,831 in 

cont inuou 
he figures 
r e was a d 
nd further 
er i ndus t r 
a common n 
npaid farm 

i ncome in 
n the pa s t 
has increa 
operations 
very time 
ome emp loy 

been an a 
hr ee-quar t 
i ve, and th 
semi -ski 1 1 
eve 1 s , leas 
c r easingly 

mi grated 
oung adult 

and amb i t 



succ 
s ec 

we r 
r op 

1 OS 
i es 
a t i o 

wor 

sue 

dec 
sed 

hav 
that 
men t 
r ea 
e r s 
r ee- 
ed w 
t ab 

tec 
out 
s of 
ion. 



ess 1 ve 

onomi c 

e 1 , 790 

of 1 , 444 

ses of 394 

and services 

na 1 pattern, 

k into 

h numbers 

ade , a 

considerably 

e sought 
c ompe t i t i on 
reductions . 

of substantial 

of the 

quar t er s of 

o r ke r s , 

le to fit 

hno logical 

of the C oun t y 
better than 



In order for the economy to grow at an acceptable rate, 
jobs must be provided for men who need them — in growing industries 
in upgraded skills at good incomes. Otherwise the choice is one 
of migration or a piling up of poverty. 



Table 1 — SURRY COUNTY EMPLOYMENT, 1940-60, BY SEX 









Males 








F 


ema 


les 






I ndus t ry 


1940 


1950 


1960 


1940 




1950 




1960 


TOTAL SURRY EMPLOYMENT 


10, 


,296 


12.086 


12. 258 


2 


,862 




4 , 


384 




7 .043 


Agr icu 1 tur e 


5 


, 163 


4 ,756 


3 , 312 




256 






290 




775 


All manufacturing: 


2, 


, 350 


3,027 


3 .652 


1 


.267 




2, 


328 




3 ,650 


--Furniture- lumber 


1 


, 190 


1,152 


918 




19 






81 




65 


— Textiles 




911 


1 , 310 


1 , 616 


1 


, 193 




2, 


015 




2,825 


--Apparel 




7 


232 


72 




29 






180 




457 


--Machi ne ry 




10 


34 


320 











3 




142 


--All other mfg. 




232 


299 


726 




26 
241 






49 
530 




161 


Business services 


1 


,244 


1 ,799 


2,276 


892 


Professional services 




346 


513 


627 




404 






584 




780 


All other industries 


1 


. 193 


1,991 


2.391 




694 






652 




946 


EMPLOYMENT CHANGE 






L940-50 


L950-60 






L94C 


1-50 




L950-60 


TOTAL SURRY EMPLOYMENT 






+ 1 .790 


+ 172 






+ 1 , 


522 




+ 2, 


,659 


Agr icu 1 tur e 






-407 


-1 , 444 








34 






485 


All manufacturing: 






677 


625 






1_, 


061 




_l_j 


,322 


--Furniture- lumber 






-38 


-234 








62 






-16 


— Textiles 






399 


306 








822 






810 


--Apparel 






225 


-160 








151 






277 


--Machinery 






24 


286 








3 






139 


--All other mfg. 






67 


427 








23 






112 


Business services 






555 


477 








289 






362 


Professional services 






167 


114 








180 






196 


All other industries 






798 


400 








-42 






294 



Source: U. S. Census data, 



Residents' Place of Work: 



Surry County provides some two thousand manufacturing 
jobs and fifteen hundred other jobs for outside residents, 
while fewer than fourteen hundred Surry residents commute 
elsewhere. Table 2 presents the data by township. The 
large industries in Elkin account for most of the in-commuting. 
Knobs Township, Yadkin County, and Edwards Township, Wilkes 
County, are adjacent to Elkin, each lacks large employers, 
and the two together have eighteen hundred residents employed 
in Surry; most of the other nine hundred in-commuters from 
Wilkes and Yadkin counties also work in Elkin. The Stokes 
County contingent work in nearby Pilot Mountain or Mount Airy. 
Data were unavailable for an estimated five hundred in-commuters 
from Virginia to Mount Airy. A factor common to the counties 
supplying this large number of in-commuters is that they all 
have had absolute declines in employment for males during the 
past decade; in addition, all are primarily agr i c u 1 1 u ra 1, and 
all have had heavy rates of ou t -mi grat i on . 

Since Surry County's economic situation is generally better 
than that of its Wilkes, Yadkin, and Stokes neighbors, it is 
not surprising that few Surry residents commute into those 
counties. Table 2 shows that Winston-Salem and Forsyth County 
employ 709 Surry residents, most of them from the southeastern 
third of the County, from as far away as Mount Airy. 

Within the County it is obvious that commuting is heavy. 

out of five County residents are rural (±.e_., live outside 
n or Mount Airy), yet the towns of Elkin, Mount Airy, Pilot 
tain, and Dobson, employ nearly four of five County workers, 
culture notably excluded. Appendix A shows that textiles, 
iture, and other manufacturing workers reside across the 
ty, although places of employment are in the four towns. 
960, 4,396 manufacturing workers (sixty percent of the County 
1) were rural nonfarm residents, 985 were rural-farm residents 
1,921 lived in Elkin and Mount Airy. Town residents were 
rally business and professional personnel and, in industry, 
e collar or technical workers. The in-commuters (quite the 
site of the industrial North) were generally semi-skilled or 
r blue collar workers with less education and lower incomes. 



Four 
Elki 
Moun 
agr i 
f ur n 
Coun 
In 1 
t ota 
and 
gene 
wh i t 
oppo 
o the 



NUMBER AND PERCENT OF EMPLOYED NONFARM RESIDENTS WHO WORKED IN OTHER 
COUNTIES, 1960 (+ indicates fewer than 10) 



SURRY RESIDENTS WORKING ELSEWHERE OUTSIDE RESIDENTS WORKING IN SURRY 

Residence Wor k in Forsyth E Isewhe re Residence Number Percent 

Number Percent Number Percent 

SURRY TOTAL 709 5 . 1% 653 4 . 7% WILKES COUNTY 

E dwa r ds Twp . 
New Cas tie 
Rock Creek 
S ome r s 
Trap Hill 
Other Wilkes 

YADKIN COUNTY 

Boonvi lie Twp . 

Buck Shoal 

Deep Creek 

Knobs 

Other Yadkin 



B ryan Twp . 


16 


7.8 


21 


10 . 2 


Dobs on Twp . 


44 


5.3 


33 


3. 9 


Eldora 


43 


13.5 


28 


8 . 8 


Elkin TOWN 


21 


1.8 


111 


9 . 7 


Rest of Twp. 


28 


3.7 


52 


6.3 


Franklin 


* 


* 


39 


9. 1 


Long Hill 


12 


10.6 


12 


10. 6 


Mar sh 


12 


7 . 2 


* 


* 


Mt. Airy TOWN 


62 


2. 2 


83 


2.9 


Rest of Twp. 


122 


2.4 


126 


2. 6 


Pilot Twp. 


137 


17.8 


32 


4 . 2 


Rockf ord 


40 


20.0 


* 


+ 


Shoals 


63 


39.7 


* 


* 


S i loam 


41 


56.9 


* 


* 


S. Westfield 


28 


23. 5 


20 


16 . 8 


S tewar t s Creek 


* 


* 


28 


5. 6 


Westfield 


24 


11.6 


52 


25. 1 



STOKES COUNTY 
Big Creek 
Quaker Gap 
Yadkin 



942 


57 . 5 


90 


28 . 7 


45 


5. 1 


37 


19. 3 


322 


64 . 3 


79 


-- 


1193 


19.6% 


143 


20. 5 


61 


10 . 6 


49 


6 . 6 


867 


50 . 


73 




202 


4. 67c 


58 


36. 9 


48 


38 . 1 


96 


6. 



Source: Unpublished U.S. Census data, obtained by the Division of Community Planning. 



MAJOR ECONOMIC COMMITMENTS OF SURRY COUNTY 



I n 
A c 
for 
of 
and 
i n 
In 
f ou 
by 
Alt 
1 es 
spe 
sub 
t io 
i nd 
ba s 
ma r 
r i s 
fas 
Thi 



what economic activities does Surry County specialize? 



ompar i s 
the na 
workers 
mining 
all the 
1960, t 
r th of 
agr i cu 1 
hough t 
s than 
c iali za 
s tant ia 
na 1 1 y . 
u s t r i es 
ed on p 
ket . A 
e , ther 
t er rat 
s ha s b 
i m i la r 



on of 
t i on s 
i n t e 
Fu r 
s e (ex 
ex t i 1 e 
the Co 
t u r e — 
here w 
that f 
t i on . 
lly la 
It is 
are ' 
r oduc t 
sane 
e i s a 
e and 
een th 
t r e nd 



Sur r 
hows 
xti 1 



y employ 

that Su 

e s , agr i 



men t d i s 

r r y ha s 

culture ; 



t r i bu 

hi ghe 

f u r n 



t i ons 
r con 
i tur e 



ther 
c ep t 
s em 
un t y 
4,08 
ere 
or t 

Fur 
rger 

int 
bas i 
ion 
c ono 

ten 
for 
e na 
into 



more, S u 
f u r n i t u 
ployed 4 
' s total 
7 worker 
2 , 320 re 
he nat i o 
ni tur e , 

in Sur r 
cresting 
c i ndus t 
of goods 
my raa tur 
dency f o 
the ba s i 
t i onal t 
the ec o 



r r y ' s re 
re) i nc r 
,441 Sur 

emp 1 oym 
s i more 
tail wor 
n , so it 
apparel j 
y than i 

that al 
r i es ' — t 

for an 
es and g 
r servic 
c i ndus t 
r end , an 
nom i c f u 



la t i V 
eased 
r y wo 
en t . 
than 
ke r s , 
is n 
and 
n the 
1 the 
hat i 
expo r 
ene r a 
es to 
r i es 
d thi 
t u r e 



e spe 
f r om 

r ker s 
This 

a f if 
the 

t CO 

m i n i n 
na t i 
spec 

s , ac 

1 i nc 
i nc r 

to le 
s rep 

of Su 



Wl 

c en 

I s 

c i a 

19 

: ^ 

wa 
th 
pro 
ns i 
g a 
on , 
ial 
tiv 
e_ , , 
ome 
eas 
ve 1 
or t 
r ry 



th those 
trations 
ppa r e 1 , 
1 i za t i on 
50 to 1960 . 
bout one- 
s followed 
of the total, 
portion was 
dered a local 
1 s o were 

p ropor - 
i za t i on 
i t i es 

nonlocal) 

1 ev els 
e a t a 

off . 

projects 

C ounty . 



Trends in Textiles, Surry's Ma.ior Economic Commitment : 

Despite the growth and competitive vigor of County 
firms, Surry is not likely to achieve long-run growth through 
its heavy commitment to an industry whose employment is 
declining nationally (down 22.3% from 1950-60). There is 
good evidence that the preceding statement is in error, for: 
in 1962 local textile firms added at least 360 jobs; County 
firms gained in employment from 5,900 in 1950 (3,325 of them 
Surry residents) to 6,436 (4,441 Surry residents) in 1960. 
Yet a very strong industrywide trend is in the direction of 
fewer workers in the future. 



Costs of materials and labor, losses of major product 
lines to other industries (synthetic fibres, plastics, 
nonweave paper-process grey goods), production saturation, 



foreign importSj and labor-saving techno logy--a 1 1 produce 
intensive competition, mergers, and mechanization, reducing 
needs for labor. The most recent data comparing Surry 
textile industry with the State are from the 1958 Census of 
Manufactures. They show that pay per employee was higher 
in Surry than in the State ($2,953 vs. $2,888), but Surry 
productivity in value added less pay per employee was much 
lower ($1,391 vs. $1,907), and capital expenditures per 
employee were lower for Surry ($107 vs. $231). 

The expected decrease in employment may be beneficial, 
for more plant modernization will help stabilize the industry 
and upgrade the labor force. Future employees, although 
fewer in number, will have higher skills, more education, and 
higher incomes. The assumption is that Surry firms will thrive 
and be more capital-intensive in production. 



Agriculture. Surry's Greatest Commitment in the Past: 



As recently as 1940, half the employed males in Surry 
County were primarily engaged in agriculture. In 1960, the 
proportion was down to a fourth. Table 3 presents data on 
the trend since 1945. After World War II, the number of farms, 
particularly in tobacco, increased, but from 1950-59 the 
number of farms dropped by nearly a thousand, and p r i c e -ac r eage 
controls reduced tobacco's share of farm income from more than 
80% to less than 7 0%. Since 1954 there has been a boom in 
assembly- 1 i ne broiler production with high per-unit farm 
capitalization; this has fostered the establishment of one 
of the State's largest poultry processing plants at Dobson, 
In 1960, however, there were still 3,500 farm households, not 
counting part-time or pastime farming, most of them small, 
marginal, and i 1 1- equ i pped . An unusually high proportion of 
farm residents receive most of their incomes from nonfarm work. 
Since textile, furniture, and apparel manufacturing are not 
long-run growth industries, the probable decrease in demand 
for workers in these industries will affect the rural population 
most directly and lead to heavy continued ou tm i gra t i on . The 
living standards of the whole area may well be raised: 1) if 
education and skill levels are upgraded for rural residents; 



AGRICULTURAL DATA FOR SURRY COUNTY, 1945-59 



1954 



1959 



Number of farms 

% real change in farms 

% change for the State 



3,711 



4 , 306 
+ 16 . 0? 
+ 0.4? 



4 , 297 
-0.2% 
-7.2% 



3 , 397 

-13.6% 

-22.6% 



Ave. size of farms (A.) 
Ave. size for Lhe State 



66 . 4 
64 . 8 



61.2 
67 . 



61 . 4 
68 . 2 



71.2 
83 . 4 



operators work off farm 100+ days 
off farm 100 days for the State 
farms most income not agriculture 
most income not agriculture for N.C: 



AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS SOLD: 

Average per farm 

Average per farm for the State 

All products sold ($000) 



5. 1% 
13,3% 



$1,821 
1,701 

$6,757 



15.0% 
20 . 8% 
17.1% 
26.9% 



16.8% 
25.1% 

17.7% 
26.7% 



1 ,, 890 
1 , 929 



$8,139 



$2 , 663 
2.737 



$ 11 , 463 



19.5% 
2 6.6% 

2 6.6% 

3 3.8% 



;3 , 816 
4 , 184 



PERCENT OF PRODUCTS SOLD: 
— Vegetables 

— F r u i t s , nu t s 

— Forest &. horticulture 

— Fie Id crops 

— Poultry products 

— Dairy products 

— Other livestock products 



. 2% 

2 . 3 
. 8 

83.5 
7 . 4 

3 . 8 
2.0 



. 1% 

. 3 

1 . 5 
i6 . 7 

4 . 9 
3 . 
3 , 5 



. 1% 

1 . 8 

1 , 9 
!4 . 8 

5 . 6 
3 . 

2 . 8 





1 
71 
17 

4 , 

5 , 



VALUE OF FARM PROPERTY: 
Per farm (land buildings) 
Per farm for the State 



;3 , 369 
3 . 490 



;5 .706 
6 , 490 



57 , 359 
8,059 



11 , 349 
14-685 



Per acre of farms 

Per acre for the State 



$51 
54 



$95 
99 



$126 
128 



$164 
193 



Censuses of Agriculture. 



2) i 

when 

at ta 

1 eve 

of p 

rate 

reas 

and 

As c 

size 

rema 

cont 

use, 

prac 



f they 
local 
inment 
Is . Ta 
r oduc t s 
of dec 
ons i t 
farm po 
he ma r g 
s pr odu 
ini ng c 
r ibu t i o 
crops , 
t i c es . 



m 1 gr 
kind 
of a 
ble 

sol 
r eas 
is e 
pula 
i na 1 
c t i o 
omme 
n to 

liv 



ate to 
s of em 

style 
3 shows 
d ; valu 
e in fa 
xpec ted 
t i on ma 

farm u 
n , and 
r c i al f 

the ec 
es t oc k J 



places 
p loymen 
of life 

that S 
e per f 
rm emp 1 

that f 
y be St 
nits di 
va lue w 
arms wi 
o nomy t 

capita 



of gr 

t a re 
comp 
u r r y 
arm ^ 
oy men 
u t u r e 
e e p e r 
sappe 
ill i 
11 be 
h r ou g 
1 i nv 



eater 

i nad 

a rabl 

farms 

size 

t F 

deer 

than 

ar 

nc r ea 

impo 

h d i V 

es t me 



oppor tuni ty 
equa t e for 
e with na t i ona 1 

lag in value 
of farm, and 
or these 
eas es in farms 

in the past, 
verage farm 
se, and the 
r tant per-unit 
ersity of land 
nt , and market 



Other Ma.ior Commitments of the Surry Economy : 



Airy 
qual i 
983 i 
s tabi 
f ur ni 
pr odu 
vs . $ 
$190) 
pa r t i 
prove 



Furniture : The largest employer of men in Mount 
is the furniture industry, long noted for its hi 
ty products. Employment decreased from 1,233 t 
n the past decade, and this important economic 
lizer in 1958 compared unfavorably with the Sta 
ture industry in pay per employee ($2,570 vs. $ 
ctivity in value added minus pay per employee ( 
2,209), and capital expenditures per worker ($ 
Further employment decreases are anticipated 
cularly if the competitive situation fails to i 



te 

3 , 104) 

$1,031 

28 vs . 



Apparel : This relatively new and growing local 
industry draws upon the female labor pool established 
by textiles. Despite continued employment expansion, 
the prognosis for future growth is guarded, because the 
national industry is one of slow-growth. Apparel is 
also a low income-generating industry in return to 
capital, management, land, and labor. Surry apparel in 
1958 was below State apparel figures for pay per employee 
($2,302 vs. $2,374) and productivity in value added less 
pay per worker ($1,266 vs. $1,549). Most of the Surry 
industry is in Mount Airy, and employees are generally 
women from the surrounding rural nonfarra area. 



- 11 - 



Mining and stone products ; A huge granite quarry 
near Mount Airy and allied stone products industries 
are important and stable employers of men. Although 
employment increased during the past decade, mechaniza- 
tion limits probable future employment growth. 



iusiness Trends in Surry County : 



Surry County is generally carved up into two 
retail trading areas by cross-county rivals Mount Airy 
and Elkin. Mount Airy, the larger and more centrally 
located within the County, continues to dominate the 
service sector of the economy. Elkin, on the other 
hand, dominates a heavily populated area in Wilkes and 
Yadkin counties, as well as southwestern Surry. Table 
4 presents computations based on census data for 1958 
retail sales and 1959 personal income. Although Mount 
Airy has greater sales and total area income, Elkin 
is revealed as a tradinfj center with much greater sales 
to customers outside its whole township. Its sales were 
almost double the amount bought by all residents of its 
township, not including sales in firms just outside the 
town limits. Although separate data are not available 
for Pilot Mountain, that town is a trading center for 
the rural area nearby in Scokes County. In summary, 
Surry County retail business is demonstrably larger 
by a full fourth than would be expected from its popu- 
lation and their total income. Wholesale trade, trucking, 
warehousing, finance, and specialized business services 
are in much shorter supply, and it is obvious that Surry 
County is within the trading area of metropolitan Winston- 
Salem and Greensboro for these services. The whole County 
needs well-organized business districts and a better 
transportation system to ensure that future commercial 
development is not pulled into the W i ns t on— Sa 1 em orbit. 
In this endeavor the traditional commercial rivals across 
the County need to work together for comprehensive County 
planning and private cooperation, for mutual benefit. 
- 12 - 



RETAIL SALES, 1958, RELATIVE TO TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME OF RESIDENTS 
1959, FOR SURRY AND MAJOR TRADING CENTERS 



Mount 
Airy 



1959 Total Personal Income (000) $6,400 

1958 Total Retail Sales (000) 11,794 

--Retail Sales as % of Income 184.3% 

All Township Personal Income (000) $9,058 

--Sales as % of Township Income 130. 27o 

Expected Sales if State RS/Income 

Ratio is Used on Area Income $6,094 



$11 , 372 
21 , 108 
18 5.6% 

$26 , 304 
8 0.2% 



Actual Minus Expected Sales 



Total 
Surry 



557 , 694 
50 , 167 
87.0'? 



17 , 698 $38,816 
^$5,700 +$ 3,410 +$11,351 



Population in Outside Trading 

Area, at State Per Capita Ratio: 6,724 



4 , 022 



13 , 390 



Source: Censuses of Business and Population, 



ANALYSIS OF THE ECONOMY ^ 



dent 

mus t 

ec on 

mi X t 

quen 

Our 

with 

spec 

and 

of h 

with 

grow 

Fina 

need 



In t 

ec on 

be u 

omy . 

u r e o 

ces f 

compa 

thos 

ial i z 

quar r 

ow we 

in th 

th pr 

iiy, 

ed to 



he p 
om i c 
nder 

The 
f el 
or t 
r i so 
e f o 
es i 
y an 
11 S 
e i r 
oduc 
a pr 

gau 



as t 

un i 
s t oo 

ec o 
emen 
he a 
n of 
r th 
n t e 
d St 
ur r y 
nat i 
ed 1 
o jec 
ge e 



one 
t - 

d as 
nomy 
t s w 
r ea 

Sur 
e na 
xtil 
one 

i nd 
ona 1 
ong- 
t i on 
f f ec 



could 
Today 

i nt e 

of S 
hi ch 
c onsi 
r y em 
t i on 
es , a 
p r odu 
us t r i 

i ndu 
run g 

of 1 
ts of 



spea 
the 
grate 
urry 
can b 
der ed 
pi oym 
r ev ea 
gr i cu 
c t s , 
es ha 
s t r i e 
r ow th 
970 e 
ec on 



k of an 
local fa 
d parts 
County 5 
e ana 1 y z 

within 
ent di s t 
1 ed that 
1 tur e , f u 

Th ere r 
V e gr own 
s and wh 
, s tab i 1 
mp 1 oy men 
omi c t r e 



a r ea as 
c t o rs of 
within t 
then . is 
ed and t 
t he nat i 
r i bu t i on 

the Sur 
r ni ture J 
ema in as 

in c omp 
ether t h 
i t y i or 
t by i nd 
nds in t 



an in 
prod 
he na 
a pa 
heir 
onal 
s by 
ry ec 
appa 
sessm 
e t i t i 
is re 
dec 1 i 
us t r y 
he f u 



d epen- 
uc t i on 
t i ona 1 
r t i cu lar 
c ons e- 
setting. 
i ndus try 
onomy 
r e 1 , 
ents 
on 

la t i V e 
ne . 
i s 
ture. 



How well have local industries competed within their 
respective national industries ? VERY WELL. Surry County's 
nonagr icul tural industries had a competitive gain of 3,461 
jobs over their national counterpart industries from 1950 
to 1960. (Appendix B presents details by industry by sex 
and explains the computations in a methodological note.) 

Have all Surry activities, taken together, led the 
economy in a direction of long-run growth ? NO.' In fact, 
2,313 of the competitive job gains of 1950-60 were wiped 
out because of the slow-growth or declining character of 
the industries which are present in Surry County. Competi- 
tive gains, however, were sufficient to give the County 
a net gain of 1,148 in employment over the national average 
rate. Surry County's employment gains, then, have been 
concentrated in nongrowth industries with poor prospects 
of future expansion to meet normal job needs of the County's 
popu la t i on . 



_1/ This section is derived from computations used in th( 
Mount Airy Population and Economy Report, 1962. 



Which industries are leading to ward long-ru n growth? 

i nd 



Which ones toward decli 



i ndus t r i es in A 

— Industri 

Indus 

( s ton 

— Industri 

c ompe 

t i on , 

— I ndus t r i 

i ndus 

whole 

c ons t 

also 

heavy 

t ex t i 

These 

--Industri 

i ndu s 

c omrau 

The above do no 

overall decline 



ppen 
es w 
try 
e pr 
es w 
ti ti 

med 
es w 
try 
sal e 
rue t 
i nc 1 

gai 
les , 

i nd 
es w 
try 
ni ca 
t in 

i n 



dix 

i th 
gain 
oduc 
i th 
V e 1 
ic i n 
ith 
loss 

t r a 
ion, 
uded 
ns w 

app 
us t r 
ith 
dec 1 
t i on 
c lud 
emp 1 



ne ? G 
B with 
BOTH c 
s : mac 
ts . , . ) 
long-r 
OS s es : 
e. . , )- 
compe t 
es : bu 
de, f i 
nondu 
here 
ere a 1 
ar e 1 J 
i es in 
losses 
i ne : f 
s and 
e agr i 
oymen t 



r o w t h Is 

net ga I n 
ompe t 1 1 i V 
h i n e r y , f 
--6.6% of 
un indus t 
professi 
-9.2% of 
i t i ve ga i 
siness se 
nance , bu 
rabies ( p 
are ma j or 
most cane 
mining, p 
eluded 74 

i n both 
urni tur e , 
utilities 
culture. 



ood 
al 
ry 
ona 
all 
ns 
r v i 
sin 
ape 
i n 
ell 
er s 
, 7% 
com 
tr 
)-- 
a m 



Leated by those 
n the past decade, 
ind long-run 
s, other durables 
1 1960 Surry employment, 
gains exceeding 
1 services (educa- 
Surry employment, 
exceeding long-run 
ces (retail and 
ess & repair services), 
r , chemi ca Is . . . ) ; 
dustries in which 
ed by heavy losses: 
ona 1 services. 

of all workers, 
petition and long-run 
ansportation (including 
9.5% of all Surry workers, 
a j or i ndus try of 



The 
dec 1 ine . 
of long- 
services 
hospi tal 
growing 
t h r ough 
for grow 
and smal 
that Sur 
r espec t i 
employme 
run loss 
efficien 
of i ndus 
efficien 
stress c 
would s t 



Cou 
Ev 
run 
E 

s e r 
i ndu 
comp 
th m 
ler 
ry f 
ve i 
n t i 
, th 
cy . 
trie 
cy i 
ould 
r eng 



nty 
er y 
gr ow 
duca 
vice 
s t r i 
etit 
eans 
indu 
i rms 
ndus 
n th 
e s t 

Agr 
s in 
s a 1 

wi p 
then 



ef f o 
th c 
t i on 
s?) , 
es . 
ion 

get 
stry 
, in 
trie 
e f u 
r es s 
icu 1 

whi 
most 
e ou 

the 



n th 
r t s 
hara 

(a 

fin 

The 
in a 
ting 
; as 

mai 
w 
t u r e 

sho 
tur e 
ch t 

cer 
t th 

i nd 



e t h r es 

hould b 

c t er — s 

new jun 

anc e — a 

re is d 

dec 1 i n 

a la r g 

air ead 

ntaini n 

ill mec 

I n i 

uld be 

and f u 
his r ul 
tai n to 
e firms 
us t r y i 



hold 
e mad 
uch a 
i or c 
r e am 
if fie 
ing i 
e r an 
y di s 
g the 
hani z 
ndus t 
on mo 
r ni tu 
e sho 
r edu 
here, 
n thi 



of 1 
e to 
s bu 
olle 
ong 
ulty 
ndus 
d la 
cuss 
i r V 
e op 
r i es 
de r n 
re a 
uld 
ce e 
whi 1 
s ar 



ong 
en 
sin 
ge? 
the 
i n 
try 
rge 
ed, 
igo 
era 
wi 
i za 
r e 
app 
mpl 
e g 
ea . 



-run 
cour 
ess 
) , m 
na t 
eco 
, su 
r sh 

it 
r w i 
t i on 
th i 
t i on 
outs 

ly. 

oy me 
r ea t 



grow 
age i 
and p 
edi c i 
ion's 
nom i c 
ch as 
are o 
i s mo 
thin 
s and 
ndi ca 

and 
tand i 
al tho 
nt ; a 
er ef 



t h or 
ndus tries 
r of es s i ona 1 
ne ( added 

fastest- 

gr ow t h 

text i les , 
f a sma 1 1 e r 
re likely 
thei r 

reduce 
ted long- 
productive 
ng examp les 
ugh the 

lack of this 
f i ci ency 



Pro. lections of 1970 Employment in S u rry Coun ty - 



Surry 
by sex i n 
three deca 
into the f 
used for o 
labor fore 
projected 
no change 
rates. In 
mu 1 1 i p 1 i ed 
projected 
Expec ted m 
text i 1 es , 
such as: co 
machinery , 
cat egor y f 
made in ta 
be vi r tua 1 
both indus 
change Sur 



County data on labor force participation r 
1960 were checked for consistency of rates 
des in the State and the nation and then pr 
uture. A population projection of Appendix 
btaining the figures in Table 5 to get a pr 
e. An allowance of 4% was subtracted to ge 
employment figures shown. These show virtu 
in employment in the future at population c 

Table 6. national growth rates by industry 



times Surry's 1960 employment by sex to ge 
1970 employment figures by industry for Sur 
ajor decreases in future employment in agri 
and furnitures balanced gains in growth ind 
mmercial and professional services, constru 

foods, paper, and stone manufacturing; and 
or new industries. The two independent pro 
bles 5 and 6 are shown at the bottom of Tab 
ly identical. Clearly, a considerable chan 
try and population trends would be required 
ry County's economic trend toward stability 



a t es 
over 
ejected 

F was 
ejected 
t the 
ally 
hange 
were 
t 

ry . 

cu 1 tur e , 
u s t r i es , 
c t i on ; 

the 
j ec t i ons 
1 e 6 to 
ge in 

to 



iases for Future G r o w t h : 



Coun 
r eso 
Sur r 
i ndu 
prod 
poul 
make 
prod 
Dobs 
Su r r 
spen 
is a 
thei 



P r es 
ty ' s 
ur ces 
y Cou 
s t ry , 
uc t s 
try p 

Sur r 
uc t s . 
on ha 
y inc 
d mil 

goin 
r res 



en t ma j or 
economi c 
, locally 
n ty now h 

a ma j o r 
i ndus t r y , 
r oduc t s , 
y a ma j or 
Busines 
ve thrive 
ome and p 
lions of 
g concern 
pec t i ve i 



i ndu 
f u tur 

deve 
as a 
appar 

and 
paper 

prod 
smen 
d , do 
opu la 
r e tai 
I f 
ndus t 



s t r i 
e . 

lope 
ma J o 
el i 
raa j o 

pro 
ucer 
i n M 
ing 
t i on 
1 do 

its 
r i es 



es 

Usi 
d m 
r t 
ndu 
r i 
due 

of 
oun 
a m 

wo 
11a 

f i 
. t 



are 

ng 
ana 
ex t 
s t r 
ndu 
ts . 
to 
t A 
uch 
uld 
r s 
r ms 
he 



the 
na tu 
geme 
i le 
y , a. 
s t r i 
Th 
bacc 
iry , 

gre 

i nd 
in t 

ma i 
futu 



key s t 
ra 1 an 
n t , ca 
i ndus t 

ma j or 
es in 
ousand 
o , pou 

Elkin 
at er b 
i ca t e ; 
he Cou 
n t ai n 
re ec o 



one 
d av 
pita 

ry . 

qua 
elec 
s of 
Itry 
, Pi 
usi n 

out 
nt y . 
thei 
nomy 



for 
ai la 
1 , a 
a ma 
r r y 
trie 

1 oc 
, an 
lot 
es s 
side 
Su 
r po 

wi 1 



Surry 

ble labor 

nd techno logy I 

jor furniture 

and stone 

al app 1 ianc es , 

al farmers 

d other farm 

Mountain , 

volume than 

cus t omers 
r r y , t hen , 
sition in 
1 be s tab le . 



16 - 



Table 5 -- 



PROJECTIONS OF THE SURRY COUNTY LABOR FORCE TO IPSO, 
BY AGE AND SEX 



473 



446 



421 



1,893 2 , 048 1 , 894 

2 ,847 2,553 2, 691 

2, 993 2,731 2,386 

3,757 4,423 4 , 387 

639 662 7 18 



A 


ge 


Group 


14 


-17 


18 


-24 


25 


-34 


35 


-44 


45 


-64 


60 + 



Females 



225 



242 



229 



1 , 326 1,511 1 , 358 

1,839 1,539 1 , 690 

1,831 1 , 620 1,431 

2,111 2,483 2, 545 

171 230 304 



12,602 12,863 12,497 TOTAL 
^___ LABOR FORCE 



12,258 12,348 11,997 Less 4% = 
(actual) Employment 



7 , 503 7 , 625 7 , 557 



7,043 7 , 320 7 , 255 
(actual) 



Source: 1960 from U. S. Census data. 1970 and 1980 based on 
age-sex trends in labor participation rates applied 
to population projections, Appendix F. 



PROJECTION TO 1970 OF SURRY EMPLOYMENT BY SEX--EACH INDUSTRY AT V S, RATE 



I ndus try 



Change 



Agr i cu 1 tu r e 

Manufacturing: 

Furniture, lumber 

Machinery 

Foods 

Textile 

Appar e 1 

Other manuf ac tur in£ 



3312 

3652 
918 
320 
217 

1616 

72 

509 



775 


2906 


3650 


3452 


65 


808 


142 


451 


43 


262 


2825 


1235 


457 


68 


118 


628 



3259 

68 

224 

57 

2246 

523 

141 



-200 

-110 

131 

45 

-381 

-4 

119 



3 
82 
14 
■579 
66 
23 



Commerce 2276 

Wholesale trade 256 

Retail trade 1624 

Finance, insurance, real estate 143 

Business &, repair services 253 

Professions & public administration 627 

Personal services 324 

Transport-Communications-Utilities 398 

Construction 1127 

Mining 281 

All other and new industries 261 



31 


285 


696 


1705 


137 


184 


28 


280 


780 


854 


688 


302 


61 


391 


11 


1224 


6 


204 


180 


500 


7043 


12287 


7043 


12348 



37 
864 
216 

59 

1239 

831 

67 

18 

6 

300 



178 
29 
81 
41 
27 

227 
-22 

-7 

97 

-77 

239 



284 
6 

168 
79 
31 

459 

143 

6 

7 



120 



Total Employment 
Total From Table 5 



1225! 
1225! 



7442 
7320 



29 



399 

277 



Source: 1960 data and projection rates from U. S. Census; data first appeared in the Mount Airy 
Population and Economy Report, 1962. 



ept for normal expansions allow 
s, must come through new direct 



Growth , exc 
above projection 
ec onomy ; 

— Plants to use local resources and labor, 
are labor-intensive, they tend in time t 
become declining-employment in character 
effect could be one of adding new skills 

--Industries to serve the metropolitan Win 
Greensboro market. This could mean subc 
industrial components, truckers, wholesa 
it could mean branch plants of nationwid 
to serve the Piedmont or Southeastern ma 
highways, interstate network particularl 

— Expansion of local trades and services, 
business and repair shops, and the like. 



ed for in the 
ions of the 

If such firms 
o mechanize and 
, but the overall 

and new capital, 
s t on-Sa 1 em- 
on t rac tors for 
lers, etc., or 
e firms located 
rkets. Better 
y , are needed . 

A junior college, 



'--^^'-h'"- '-^-^^-J.-LCO, d^^O-icrJ., iUJIlXLUlt:, XUIHUtiiy, 

it is not surprising that highest proportions of such workers 
are in and near the County's largest trading centers. The rural 
areas are in nongrowth agricultural and textile, apparel, and 
furniture manufacturing wo r k- - r u r a 1- f a r m residents with major 
income sources in town factories. 

Within the County the prospects are for continued domination 
by the varied and large manufacturing concerns of Mount Airy, 
and for Mount Airy to continue its trading domination of most 
of the County, despite inroads by Elkin and Winston-Salem. 

Elkin has long thrived on the success of Chatham Manufac- 
turing Company, the world's largest blanket producer. This 
firm employs thousands of persons from the rural countryside 
in Surry, Wilkes, and Yadkin counties, and Elkin business firms 
do a large proportion of all retail business in that area. The 
lack of employment expansion within the textile industry has 
led to plans for an industrial park with a broader future economic 
base. Prospects are for continued affluence and employment and 
population stability, continuing present and past trends. 



Pilot Mountain and Dobson have successful textile firms 
and more localized trading centers. Prospects: slow-growth. 



SURRY 
COUNTY 



MAP 2 



LEGEND'. 

tg^ MORE THAN 40% 

lliili; 25 - 40% 

:;:::: less than 257c 




PERCENT OF WORKERS IN INDUSTRIES OF BETTER 
THAN AVERAGE GROWTH NATIONALLY, I960 



STYLE OF LIFE IN SURRY COUNTY 



of t 
Coun 
of t 
i nco 
Moun 
t own 
r es i 
tech 
s i on 
gr ow 
cons 
the 
with 
f ac i 
gr ow 
good 
is h 
is a 
for 



The 

he S 

ty, 

he T 
me , 
t Ai 
s ha 
de i 
ni ca 
s li 
th i 
er va 
subu 

hou 
liti 
th o 

sub 
eavi 

ma j 
the 



level 

ta t e in 
howeve r 
own o f 
eduoa t i 
r y eac h 
s large 
n the s 
1 per so 
ve in t 
s quite 
t i vely 
r ban r i 
sing of 
es . Co 
f t owns 
di vi s i o 
ly rur a 
or prob 
t owns a 



of 1 

i no 

, th 

Elki 

on , 

has 

emp 

ur r o 

nnel 

he t 

dif 

draw 

ng i 

1 es 

nseq 

, an 

ns . 

1-no 

1 em 

nd f 



1 V 1 n 
ome , 
ere 
n ge 
and 

a 1 
1 oy i 
undi 

of 
owns 
fere 
n a r 
s a 
s va 
uent 
die 

Thi 
nf ar 
area 
or t 



g in Su r 
educa t i 
are s t r i 
ne ra 1 ly 
hous ing 
a r ge po r 
ng i ndus 
ng ru ra 1 
i ndus try 
The t 
n t in th 
ea c on ta 
bui 1 t-u p 
lue and 
ly , t her 
ss oppor 
s i s a m 
m despi t 

in the 
he s p r aw 



ry C 
on , 
king 
en jo 
1 eve 
t i on 
trie 
are 
and 
ypic 
is a 
ins 

are 
less 



e IS 
tuni 
a J or 
e it 
f utu 
ling 



oun ty i 
and hou 
1 y va r i 
y the S 
1 s , and 

of af f 
s , mos t 
a , wh i 1 

of bus 
a 1 pa 1 1 
r ea , f o 
the b es 
a , less 

adequa 

less a 
t y for 

r eason 
s u r ban 
re i n t e 

popu la 



s V e 
sing 
ed 1 
tat e 

Pil 
luen 

of 
e th 
ines 
er n 
r a 
t ho 

we 1 
t e c 
nn ex 
the 

tha 

eco 
grat 
t i on 



r y nea r 
With 
eve Is . 
' s high 
ot Moun 
c e . Ea 
wh OS e w 
e manag 
s and t 
of subu 
s tab 1 e 
us i ng , 
1 -dev e 1 
ommun i t 
a t i on , 
openi ng 
t Surry 
nomy , a 
ion of 
s ou t s i 



that 
in the 

Residents 
est 

tain and 
ch of these 
age-earners 
er ia 1 and 
he profes- 
r ban 
and 
wh i 1 e 
oped , 

y 

less 

of 

County 
nd i t 
planning 
de them . 



Income: 



Figure 1 gives comparative measures of income for Surry 
areas and for State and national measures. ( Mean family income 
is the average of all families' total incomes; median f am i 1 y 
i nc ome is the point at which half the families had more income, 
half less; and per capita income is the sum of incomes for all 
families and unrelated persons, divided by total population.) 



Figure 1 -- INCOME MEASURES FOR SURRY AND COMPARABLE AREAS, 1959 



$6,000 



$ F , 



$3,000 



$2,000 



$ 1 ,000 




Table 7 -- DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME BY FAMILIES IN 1959 



I nc ora e Class 



Town of 
Elkin 



Total 
U.S. 



Pilot 
Twp . 



Total 
State 



Total 
Surry 



D obs on 
Twp . 



Families with incomes 
— % of families 
— % of all income 



, 000 and over : 



30 . 1% 


2 6. 5% 


16.8% 


13.5% 


9. 5% 


4 . 1' 


56. 9 


51 . 9 


44 .8 


36 . 1 


28 . 8 


13. 



Families with incomes $3,000-7,999: 
— % of families 
— % of all income 



57 .8 


52. 1 


42. 9 


49 . 3 


51.5 


51 , 


. 7 


40 . 2 


42 . 8 


41. 5 


52.0 


56 .8 


68 , 


. 5 



Families with incomes under $3,000: 
— % of families 
— % of all income 



2. 1 


21 . 4 


40 . 3 


37 . 2 


39 . 


44 . 


. 2 


2.9 


5 . 3 


13. 7 


11 .9 


14. 4 


18 , 


. 5 



Source: Computations from both published and unpublished U. 



C ensus da ta , 



of Pilot Mountain alone are unavailable); where a small propor- 
tion of the families have very high incomes. In Dobson Township 
income levels are generally lower and homogeneous without extremes, 

Table 7 above shows just how striking the contrasts among 
towns, State, and nation, are in the proportions of high, middle, 
and low income families in each area, along with the share of 
all income by each income class. For the County the top 9.5% 
of families (those in 1959 with $8,000 or more income) had 28.8% 
of all the County's income. Elkin stands out with its large 
group of high-income families, Dobson Township with its sm. all 
high-income group, and Pilot Township with its small middle 
group (high above and below). Map 3 shows the median levels 
for all townships of the County in 1959. (See Appendix C.) 



2] 



SURRY 
COUNTY 




LEGEND; 

(TOWM OF ELKIN = 85,940- U.S.= 85,660 

;£,,__ MORE THAN STATE MEDIAN OF g 2 , _ — , | ELKIN 

3,200 - 3,955 

LESS THAN 83,200 . ^ELKIN I 



MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME, 1959 



The U . 
to describe 
3 9.0% of a 1 
those f ami 1 
quant i t y , d 
i n assess i n 
total i nc om 
in f i na nc i n 
o f demand 1 
and the c om 
control mos 
of all i nc o 
for special 
level of in 
of living, 
the bas is f 



S. Department of Labor has recentl 
families with less than $4,000 inc 
1 Surry families had less than $3,0 
ies were farm or r u ra 1 - non f a r m fami 
istribution, and expenditure of inc 
g an area's well-being. An area wi 
e or with many low-income families 
g adequate community or private fac 
imits growth of business or profess 
munity tends to stagnate. But if a 
t of the community's income, a siza 
me may be lost locally to outside i 
ized goods and services elsewhere, 
come is most conducive to improving 
upgrading private and public assets 
or continued economic growth. 



y used ' poverty ' 

ome , but in 1959 

00; most of 

lies. The 

ome are vital 

th limited 

has difficulty 

i 1 i t i es ; lack 

ional services, 
f ew fami lies 

ble proportion 

nvestments or 
A high general 
general standards 

, and c r ea ting 



The distributions of income in Elkin, Mount Airy, and 
Pilot Mountain are favorable for provision of a high level 
of commercial and professional services and lead to the 
expectation that these towns have good housing and well- 
developed community facilities; and one expects to find 
a high level of educational attainment and of white collar 
and technical workers. By the same token, the less-favored 
rural areas would be expected to be lacking in other attributes. 

Educat i on : 



Map 3 and Appendix D present detailed data by township 
for Surry County on educational attainment levels of adults. 
Elkin stands out, followed by Mount Airy and the townships of 
Pilot and Westfield. Figure 2 gi ves compa r a t i ve data, 1950 
and 1960, for Elkin, Mount Airy, the County, State, and nation. 
It has been suggested that the improvement in educational level 
for the County was held back by outmigration of many youths 
with better than average education. Some 17.6% of all County 
adults lacked a fifth-grade education; these people are called 
'functional illiterates,' and as modern technology advances, 
they will be less and less able to meet the demand for more' 
education and higher skills in jobs, leading to chronic 
unemployment and lowered levels of living for their families. 



Figure 2 -- MEDIAN EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT OF ADULTS AGES 25 AND OVER, 1950-1960 

Years Completed 
12.3 



10.6 



1950 
1960 



Elkin Urban 
U.S. 



Urban 
N. C . 



M T u n t 
A i r V 



To ta 1 
U.S. 



Total 
N. C . 



Surry 
Count' 



SURRY 
COUNTY 



/ ...... 



MAP 4 



legend: 

-SjM' above U.S. MEDIAN OF 10.6 
jij;" ABOVE N.C. MEDIAN OF 8.9 

8.0 - 8.9 
-i-'-:- UNDER 8.0 




MEDIAN EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT 
OF ADULTS AGES 25 AN OLDER 



great 
upgra 
going 
are c 
r ec ora 
c ommu 
this 
a 1 1 en 
the i 
f urth 
wou 1 d 
Count 
in el 
Elkin 
inc r e 
that 
will 
for m 
Every 
educa 
educa 
a con 



The 

ly 

ding 

thr 
r owd 
mend 
ni t y 
move 
d CO 
nven 
er i 

upg 

y • 

emen 
, Mo 
as es 
f utu 
be t 
Oder 
ef f 
t i on 
t i on 
t i nu 



educa 
mp r ov 

of s 
ough 
ed an 
ed th 

coll 
, bee 
1 1 ege 
t ory 
nduce 
rade 
In th 
tary 
unt A 

in h 
re en 
hat f 
ni za t 
o r t s 

to u 

for 
ous m 



t i ona 
ed ov 
choo 1 
upper 
d the 
at Mo 
eges . 
ause 
who 
of pr 
ment 
the c 
e pub 
grade 
iry a 
igh s 
r o 1 Im 
utur e 
i on o 
hou Id 
pgrad 
ev e r y 
i ni mu 



1 sy s t e 

er the 

plant s 

grades 

demand 

unt Air 

The C 

it wou 1 

cou Id n 

of essi o 

for a 1 1 

u 1 tu r a 1 

lie sch 

s now t 

nd Coun 

choo 1 . 

en t s wi 

school 

r c onso 

be mad 

e the a 

chi Id 
m goa 1 



m for 

y ea r s 

No 

of s 

for 
y be 
oun ty 
d ena 
o t o t 
nals 
r ac t i 

and 
ools, 
han t 
ty sc 

Popu 
lino 

f aci 
lidat 
e to 
dult 
of no 
t hr ou 



Sur 
thr 
w th 
choo 
coll 
the 

sho 
ble 
her w 
in t 
on o 
i nt e 
enr o 
hey 
hool 
lati 
t in 
liti 
i on , 
p r ov 
popu 
r ma 1 
ghou 



ry C 
ough 
at t 
1 , h 
ege 
site 
uld 
many 
i s e , 
he a 
f ne 
llec 
lime 
were 
s , w 
on p 
area 
es w 

rat 
i de 
lati 

int 
t th 



oun t y h 

c ons o 1 

he ' bab 

igh sch 

is hi gh 

of one 

unite i 

1 oca 1 

it wou 

r ea , it 

w i ndus 

tual 1 i 

nt s are 

i n the 

hile al 

r o j ec t i 

s e , so 

ill be 

her t ha 

adu It a 

on , and 

el 1 i gen 

e Count 



as be 
i da t i 
y boo 
ool f 
I t 

of t 
n fur 
y ou th 
Id in 

wou 1 
try , 
fe of 

aire 

pas t 
1 hav 
ons i 
the e 
neede 
n pup 
nd vo 

a hi 
c e sh 

y . 



en V 
ons 
m ' i 
ac i 1 

ha s 
he S 
t he r 
s to 
c r ea 
d be 
and 

the 
ady 

yea 
e ha 
ndic 
xpec 
d pr 
il g 
cat i 
gh s 
ould 



er y 
and 
s 

i t i es 
been 
ta t e ' s 
in^ 

se 

a 

it 

lower 

r s in 
d big 
ate 

ta t i on 
ima r i ly 
a i ns . 
ona 1 
choo 1 
be 



Housing : 



late 
of h 
Coun 
only 
hous 
f igu 
occu 
by M 
plan 
h ou s 
anne 
blig 
hous 



Sine 
r Ian 
ous i n 
ty c i 

the 
ing u 
re is 
pied 
ount 
ning 
ing 1 
xa t i o 
ht . 
ing p 



e hou s 
d use 
g here 
t i zens 
towns 
nits c 
almos 
hou sin 
Ai r y ' s 
should 
nven t o 
n , to 
I t mus 
rob lem 



ing will 

reports 

will be 

Map 5 

and thei 

lassifie 

t exac 1 1 

g , Elkin 

$9 , 700 

be poi n 

r y thr ou 

encourag 

t be r em 

s r emai n 



be 
for 

as 

and 
r V i 
d 's 
y ha 

ha s 
and 
ted 
gh z 
e go 
embe 

i n 



t r eat 
the C 
a gau 

Appe 
ci ni t 
tanda 
lf--5 

a hi 
Pilot 
t owar 
oni ng 
od de 
red t 
built 



ed mo 
ou n t y 
ge of 
nd i X 
i es h 
rd, ' 
0.3%. 
gh me 
Moun 
d con 
, sub 
velop 
hat S 
-up c 



re c omp 

and it 

the s t 

D show 

ave mo r 

and for 

I n va 

d i an of 

tain ' s 

t i nuous 

di V i s i o 

men t s a 

ur r y Co 

ommuni t 



r eh e 
s to 
y le 
that 
e th 

the 
lue 

$ 11 
$8,2 

upg 
n re 
nd d 
unt y 
ies 



nsi V 
wns , 
of 1 

i n 
an h 

Cou 
of o 
, 000 
00 . 
r adi 
gula 
i SCO 
' s b 
outs 



e ly in 
mention 

i f e of 

this area 

alf their 

n t y this 

wner - 

, followed 
Future 

ng of the 

t i o n s , a nd 

u rage 

iggest 

i de t owns . 



23 



SURRY 
COUNTY 



MAP 5 



LEGEND: 

MORE THAN 50°/c 



LESS THAM 35°/c 




PERCENT HOUSING UNITS SOUND AND 
WITH COMPLETE PLUMBING, I960 



Interrelationships of Income. Education, Housing. Occupation- 
As Determiners of the Style of Life : 



T 

not is 
fully 
someon 
techni 
are mu 
Also, 
owni ng 
p r es t i 
time, 
educa t 
s 1 ml la 
c 1 rcura 
t 1 onal 
of mat 
And so 
reward 
genera 
these 
style 

M 
educa t 
I f the 
obvi ou 
income 
Elkin 
1 nc ome 
educa t 
f ami 1 i 
total 
on the 
or uns 
p r o f 1 1 



he measures of style of life 
olated characteristics which 
apart from each other. It is 
e with a good education will 
cal or professional employmen 
ch greater than those for per 
someone with high Income is b 

an expensive home of quality 
gious area we 1 1 -pr ot ec t ed by 
a child reared In an envlronm 
ed parents in close associati 
rly comfortable and Intellect 
stances, is more motivated to 

attainment than Is a child f 
erlal, social, and Intellectu 

the associations are relnfor 
s are greatest in skills, bus 
lly requiring high educationa 
financial rewards are means t 
of llf e . 



use 
can 
qu 
be 
t 1 
son 
oth 

CO 

goo 

ent 
on 
ua 1 
se 
r om 
al 
ced 
1 ne 
1 a 
o a 



d in 

be 
i te 
able 
n wh 
s wi 

abl 
ns t r 
d zo 

of 
with 
1 y s 
ek a 

an 

impo 

T 

s s es 

t ta i 

bet 



thl 
disc 
like 

to 
i ch 
th 1 
e an 
uc 1 1 
ning 
well 

pee 
1 1 mu 

hig 
envl 
ve r 1 
he f 

I or 
nmen 
t e r - 



s rep 
u s s ed 
ly th 
qua 1 i 
i nc om 
ess e 
d des 
on an 
At 
-bein 
r s f r 
latin 
her e 
r onme 
shm en 
1 nanc 
prof 
t , an 
qual 1 



o r t are 
meaning- 

at 

f y for 

e r ewa r ds 

ducation . 

i r ous o f 

d 1 n a 
the same 

g by 

om 

g 

duca- 

nt 



ial 

es s i ons 

d 

ty 



aps 
1 on , 

cat 
sly 

and 
and 

and 
i ona 
es h 
f ami 

oth 
kill 
e of 



3 , 4 , 

and 
egor 1 
that 

hous 
Mount 

hous 
1 lev 
ave t 
ly in 
e r ha 
ed an 



and 
housi 
es f o 
they 
ing. 

Airy 
ing 1 
els a 
wo or 
comes 
nd , m 
d wit 
ood w 



5 pr 

ng f 

r ea 

are 

The 

tow 

evel 

re w 

mor 

and 

OS t 

h lo 

o r kl 



esen 
or S 
ch a 
a Imo 

onl 
nshl 
s a r 
ell 
e in 

abl 
of t 
w ed 
ng c 



ted 
u r ry 
re c 
s t 1 
y si 
ps o 
e ab 
bel o 
c ome 
llty 
his 
uca t 
lass 



summary 

C oun t y 

ompar ed 

den t i ca 

gni f i ca 

ut side 

ove ave 

w aver a 

ea r ner 

to aff 

populat 

i ona 1 a 

a r ea . ' 



measures of income, 
by town and township, 
it is immediately 
1, particularly on 
nt exceptions are in 
the towns; there the 
rage , but adu 1 t 
ge . The re most 
s, adding up to good 
ord good housing; 
ion is semi-skilled 
ttalnment, a typical 



Special c r os s - tabu la 1 1 ons of census data for Surry 
County, privately obtained through the U. S. Bureau of the 
Census, show the interrelationships of the style of life 



measures in tables 8, 9, and 10. These relationships would 
be expec ted: 

--The higher the household income, the higher the 
educational level of the household head and the 
more likely he is to be a white collar worker. 
--The higher the household income, the greater the 

value of housing owned, and the better the condition 
of housing occupied. 
--The higher the educational attainment of the head of 
household, the more likely he is to be a white collar 
worker, and the more valuable the housing he owns. 
It is no surprise that the data bear out these relationships 
quite closely (note the lines enclosing hi gher- than-expec t ed 
p r opo r t i ons ) . 



Surry County has a large population which is uneducated . 



impoverished, and ill-hous 



17.6% 
with 
had t 
units 
full 
of te 
for t 
pr ima 
he ca 
pr ovi 
for s 
a pop 
of th 
bu t i 



of 
less 
o t a 1 

wer 
c omp 
chno 
he n 
ry r 
n f o 
s i on 
elf- 
ula t 
e wh 
t is 



adu 1 1 
than 
i nco 
e ' su 
1 emen 
logic 
ecess 
espon 
r him 

for 

suf f i 

i on w 

o 1 e p 

also 



s ag 
a f 
mes 
bs ta 
t of 
a 1 a 
i t i e 
s i bi 
self 
thos 
c i en 
i t ho 
opu 1 
a c 



es 2 
if th 
unde 
ndar 

p lu 
chi e 
s of 
lity 

and 
e in 
cy . 
u t e 
a t i o 
once 



5 an 
-gra 
r $3 
d ' -- 
mbi n 
veme 

lif 

i s 

his 

wan 

No 
duca 
n, t 
r n f 



ed 
d ov e 
de ed 
, 000 
ei t he 
g f ac 
n t is 
e , or 
i ndi V 
f ami 
t , pa 
c ommu 
t i on 
hen , 
or th 



For the 
r are ' 
uca t i on 
each ; a 
r di lap 
i 1 i t i es 
such t 
even t 
i dual : 
ly, but 
r t icu la 
ni ty ca 
or s k i 1 
is a ma 
e commu 



County a 
f unc t i ona 
; 3 9 . 0% o 
nd 4 9.7% 
i da ted or 
Our na 
hat no on 
he luxur i 
one must 

one must 
r ly to pr 
n afford 
Is. The 
jor plann 
ni ty ' s mo 



s a who le , 
1 illiterates' 
f all f ami lies 
of all housing 

1 ac king a 
t i ona 1 1 ev e 1 
e need want 
es. The 
ach i eve wha t 

also make 
ov i de means 
the luxury of 
style of life 
ing concern, 
ral fibre. 



Table 8 -- EDUCATION AND OCCUPATION OF HEADS OF SURRY HOUSEHOLDS -- BY FAMILY INCOME^ 1960 



Percent Distributi 


on 


Class 
as % 

of 
Total 








Total 


Income of Househo 


Id (% add 


across) 




Each Class 


U nder 
$3 ,000 


$3 ,000- $5 , 000- 
$4 ,999 6 ,999 


$7 ,000- 
9 ,999 


$10 
and 


000 Class 
over Total 


EDUCATION OF HEAD: 




49.7% 

23 . 

23. 3 

4 . 1 












10 


97o 


4 


9% 







Under 8 years 


[77 


4% 


30 
1 32 


0% 
5 


9% 10 0.0% 


8 - 1 1 y ea r s 


35 


9 
9 

7 


17 


6 

8 


9 

14 

9 


7 
4 
6 


1 4 


3 


100 . 


12 - 15 years 
16+ years 


19 
10 


25 

29 


3 

1 


27 
29 


13 

20 


4 

7 


100 . 
100. 


Total 
OCCUPATION OF HEAD 


Id 

re e 
ed 


100 .0 

4 .8% 

7 . 2 

4 .8 

3 . 6 

13.9 

20 . 8 

16.6 

. 8 

3 . 

3 .9 

20.4 


39 

5 
16 
20 
31 
14 


8 

7% 

9 

9 

5 

5 

Q 


29 

28 

9 

29 

24 


5 


16 


9 


8 


4 


5 


4 


100 . 


Professional 
Mgrs. , proprs. 
Clerical 
Sales 


1% 

7 
7 
1 


28 
23 
26 
23 


1% 



3 

7 
9 


17 
20 
17 
12 
12 


3% 

9 

5 

7 
8 


20 

2 9 

5 

8 


8% 

5 

5 

1 


100.0% 
100 . 
100 . 
100 . 


Crafts 


44 
41 

27 


6 
6 
8 


24 

20 


J 3 

2 






3 


1 


100. 


Operatives 




27 


7 r 


8 
5 

4 


1 



3 

4 


3 


7 100.0 


Farm 




58 
82 
51 

73 

67 


6 
9 
6 

7 

4 


J 8 


14 

7 

9 


3 


3 
5 

. 5 


100.0 


Private househo 
Other service 
Labo r er s 
Not in labor fo 
or not report 


17 
29 
18 

18 


1 
6 
8 

3 


100 . 
100.0 
100 .0 

5 100 . 


Total 




100. 




39 


8 


29 


5 


16 


.9 


8 


4 


5 


4 


100. 



Cross tabulations from U. S. Census data. 



VALUE OF OWNER-OCCUPIED PROPERTY AND OF HOUSING CONDITION BY FAMILY INCOME, 

FOR SURRY COUNTY 



1960 , 



Percent Distribution 


Class 






Total 


I nc ome for 


House 


holds 


(% a 


dd 


across) 




Each Class 


as % 
of 
























Under 


$3 , 000- 


$5 ,000- 


$7 , 000- $10 


000 Class 




Total 


$3 .000 


4 ,999 


6.999 


9,999 and over Total 


VALUE OF PROPERTY: 


2 8.6% 
22. 5 
16. 5 
11.3 








5% 


11 
1 20 


7% 



4 

5 

11 


1% 2 
3 2 


2% 
7 

3 




Under $5,000 


1 58 
28 
16 
16 


5% 

I 1 


1 23 


10 0. 0% 


$5 ,000 - 7 , 400 


43 

48 


4 
4 


100. 


$7 , 500 - 9 ,900 


24 

37 


L 
1 








100 . 


$10 ,000-12,400 


8 


16 


5 


24 


3 


5 


100.0 


$12, 500-14 ,9 00 


6. 2 

5. 7 


4 
16 


3 


38 
16 


6 
3 


37 
20 


3 
6 


14 
31 


9 


4 


4 


100 .0 


$15,000-17,400 


4 


15 


4 


100 . 


$17 ,500-19 ,900 


1.9 














33 


3 


32 


5 34 


2 


100 . 


$20 ,000-24 ,900 


3.0 
2 . 7 


10 



3 





21 




7 



21 




7 


48 


6 


41 


1 
6 


100.0 


$25 ,000-34 ,900 








56 


100 .0 


$35,000 or over 


1 . 6 














40 


2 








59 


8 


100.0 


Total 


100 . 


29 


3 


30 


3 


21 


3 


11 


7 7 


4 


100 . 


CONDITION OF HOUSING: 
























S ound 


7 5.4% 


33 


6% 


28 


7% 


20 


5% 


10 


6% 6 


6% 


10 0.0% 


Deteriorating 


18 . 5 


54 


6 


34 


5 


7 


2 


1 


5 2 


1 


100 . 


Dilapidated 


6. 1 


72 


2 


23 


4 


2 


2 


2 


2 





100 . 


Total 


100 . 


39 


8 


29 


5 


16 


9 


8 


4 




5 


4 


100 . 



Cross tabulations from U. S. Census data. 



Table 10 



-- OCCUPATION, CONDITION OF HOUSING, AND VALUE OF OWNER -OCCUP I ED PROPERTY IN SURRY 
COUNTY, BY EDUCATION QF HOUSEHOLD HEAD, 1960 



Percent Distribution 
Each Class 


Class 
as % 

of 
Total 




Education of 


Househo 


Id Head 


(% add 


across) 




Under 8-11 
8 V r s . V ea r s 


12-15 16+ 
V ea r s yea r s 


Class 
Total 


OCCUPATION OF HEAD: 


4 

7 

4 

3 

13 

20 

16 



3 

3 

20 


8% 

2 

8 

6 

9 

8 

6 

8 



9 

4 


5 
13 
16 
35 
40 


7% 9 


0% 
5 
5 
4 




Professional 


29 
55 
69 
44 
26 


8% 


55 


6% 


1 10 0.0% 


Managers, proprs. 

Clerical 

Sales 


8 
8 
9 
4 


26 
11 
15 


6 
1 

8 

1 


4 
2 
3 





6 
9 

7 
8 




8 


100 . 
100 .0 
100. 


Crafts 


1 


33 

30 


5 

9 


100.0 


Operatives 


50 
66 
76 
56 
88 

65 


9 


_J 1^ 


6 





100. 


Farm 

Private household 
Other service 
Labo r e r s 

Not in labor force 
or not reported 


1 
6 
8 
5 

6 


20 


38 
8 

17 


5 

3 

1 

6 


12 

23 

4 

3 

14 


6 

,4 

9 

5 

2 


100 . 
100 . 
100 . 
100. 

100 . 


Total 
VALUE OWNER-OCCUPIED 


100 . 

PROPERTY : 

28 . 6% 

22 . 5 

16.5 

11 . 3 

6. 2 

5.7 

1 .9 

3.0 

2. 7 

1 . 6 


49 


7 


23 

1.3 

24 




0% 

3 1 


23 

7 
17 


3 4 


1 

0% 
4 



7 


100 . 


Under $5,000 
$5 ,000 - 7 , 400 


69 

57 


6% 
3 




4% 





1 


100.0% 
100 .0 


$7 , 500 - 9 , 900 
$10 , 000-12 , 400 


33 

32 
19 
21 
34 
10 




2 
6 
3 


35 
29 
25 


2 
5 

1 


31 
35 
43 
42 

50 
79 
65 
60 


6 
2 



2 


100 . 
100 . 


$12, 500-14 ,900 


6 


12 



4 
8 

5 
2 


100 . 


$15,000-17 ,400 
$17 ,500-19,900 
$20 , 000-24 , 900 
$25,000-34 , 500 
$35 , 000 or over 


4 
2 
3 





10 



10 

10 




9 

3 
8 



3 25 
15 
5 

7 23 

8 39 


100 . 
100 . 
100.0 
100 . 
100.0 


Total 


100 





45 


4 24 





26 


3 




4 


4 


100 . 



Source: Cross tabulations from U 



Census da ta , 



POPULATION TRENDS IN SURRY COUNTY 



Since this planning report is primarily concerned with 
the relevance of past and present trends for the future, no 
historical account or tabular presentation of population data 
for past decades will be given here. 

The population of Surry County has historically been 
predominantly rural with slow, steady increases resulting 
from natural increase over ou tmi gr at i on . Since 1950, a 
much heavier outmigration of young adults has reduced the 
potential gain from births, while deaths are already 
increasing for the normally aging population. Therefore, 
the future population of the County is expected to increase 
by only 4.3% by 1980 at present age-specific rates. 



left 



Dur 
Sur 



ing 
rv C 



the 1950-60 decade some 5.584 net outmigrants 
ountv . most of them young adults under age thirty. 



It has been suggested that most of the outmigration has been 
directly caused by a lack of economic opportunity, a lack 
of available jobs for men . as agricultural, furniture, and 
a range of services have decreased or failed to expand 
sufficiently to accommodate rural job seekers. In terms 
of the wide extent of residents with low incomes, low 
education and skill levels, and poor housing, the rural 
area may be over popula t ed , calling for greater outmigration 
unless economic expansion is sufficient to accommodate more 
workers in the future. 




Table 11 -- ANALYSIS OF POPULATION CHANGE IN SURRY COUNTY, 1950-60, BY COMPONENTS 



C omponent 



Town of 
Elkin 



Town of 
Mt. Airy 



Rest of 
Surry 



Surry 
Total 



Beginning population, 1950 
Natural increase, 1950-60 
Expected population, 1960 



Net migration, 1950-60 
Actual population, 1960 



Percent migration, 1950-60 
Population change, 1950-60 



2,842 


7 


192 




35 


559 




45 ,593 


614 


1 


180 




6 


402 




8 . 196 


3 ,456 


8 


372 




41 


961 




53,789 


-588 


-1 

7 


317 

055 




-3 

38 


679 
282 




-5 . 584 


2 ,868 


48 , 205 


-17.0% 




-15. 


7% 




-8. 


8% 


-10.5% 


+ 0.9 




-1. 


9% 




+ 7 . 


7% 


+ 5.7% 



PERCENT NEW MIGRATION, SELECTED AGES: 

1950 ages 5-9; 1960 ages 15-19 -19.9'J 

10-14 20-24 -34.0 

15-19 25-29 -6.0 

20-24 30-34 -12.6 

25-29 35-39 -17.2 

30-34 40-44 -12.2 



10 


2% 


-14.9% 


-14 


6% 


12 


1 


-34 . 3 


-31 


7 


30 


9 


-29 . 4 


-28 


6 


26 


5 


- 9.5 


-12 


9 


21 


5 


-8.9 


-11 


6 


17 


2 


- 0.3 


- 4 


4 



Source: Census data; births and deaths from State Health Department. 



at higher rates, suggesting some tendency toward a suburban 
ou tml gra 1 1 on pattern for Mount Airy, but not for Elkln. The 
suburban type of movement from Mount Airy appears to receive 
support from population gains in adjacent areas, such as 
Stewarts Creek and Long Hill townships, and possibly Dobson 
Township. Elkln and Pilot Mountain have affluent managerial 
and business people, but the fact that the dominant industries 
employing the surrounding population are tending to decline 
reduces employment and population expansion in the towns as 
well as the outlying areas. 



Population Pro. lections: 



comp 

area 

With 

the 

will 

f utu 

same 

coho 

be tw 

used 

goin 

on t 

proj 

emp 1 

A pr 

whic 

of e 

the 

popu 

mi gh 

so c 

brig 

unin 



Pop 
u ter 
' s a 
out 
kind 

exe 
r e . 

bir 
r t w 
een 

in 
g an 
he b 
ecti 
oyme 
edl c 



u lat i 
prog 
ge-ra 
going 
s of 
r t a 

I mpr 
th an 
ere i 
a pro 
p lann 
d wha 
asi s 
on ma 
nt an 
tlon . 



h ma 
vent 
citi 
latl 
t be 
hang 
ht er 
form 



y be 
ual i t 
zens 
on wi 
that 
e bas 
, but 
a t i ve 



on p 
ram 
c e-s 

int 
f ac t 
simi 
ovem 
d ne 
nvol 
jec t 
ing 
t th 
of r 
y be 
din 

on 
base 
i es ; 
of S 
11 b 

the 
i c 

wit 

to 



ro je 
devi 
ex c 

o de 
or s 
lar 
ent 
t ml 
ved . 
ion 
to s 
el r 
eal 

pre 
dust 
the 
d on 

it 
ur ry 
ar el 

pro 
ondi 
hou t 
make 



c 1 1 on 
sed f 
ompos 
tail , 
pr odu 
force 
in mo 
grati 
A m 
and a 
how j 
cons e 
exper 
else, 
ry pr 
other 

i nf e 
is a 

C oun 
y inc 
gr es s 
t i ons 

a fa 

such 



s wer 
or an 
1 1 1 on 

the 
cing 

in t 
r ta 11 
on ra 
a jor 

pr ed 
us t w 
quenc 
1 ence 

just 
o j ec t 

hand 
r enc e 
pr oph 
ty th 
r ea s e 
i ve a 

that 
c tua 1 

a s t 



e ma 
a ly s 

dur 
basi 
Chan 
he s 
ty a 
t es 
dl s t 
1 c t i 
here 
es m 

and 

as 
i ons 
, 1 s 

fro 
ecy . 
at w 

1 n 
nd h 

the 

bas 
a t em 



de thr 
is of 
ing th 
c assu 
ge in 
ame d i 
nd con 
for ea 
i nc 1 1 o 
on : a 

pr ese 
ay be 

cone r 
in the 

on pa 

a sub 
m fact 
Thus 
1 thout 
the f u 
ar d-wo 

f utur 
is for 
ent . 



ough us 
changes 
e pas t 
mpt ion 
the las 
recti on 
t inuat 1 
ch age- 
n mus t 
project 
n t t r en 
if con t 
e t e f ac 

case o 
ges 17- 
j ec t i ve 
s or CO 

a proj 

ma j or 
tur e . 
r ki ng c 
e will 

this, 



e of 

In 
deca 
made 
t de 

in 
on o 
race 
be m 
ion 
ds a 
i nue 
t s a 
f th 
18 . 

s ta 
nsi d 
ecti 
chan 
Apr 
1 tiz 
be m 
it w 



an 
de. 

is: 
cade 
the 
f the 
- s ex 
ade 
1 s 
re 
d; 



t ement 
era t i on 
on tells 
ge their 
edl c t i on 
enry will 
uch 
ou Id be 



Appendix F gives detailed age projections for the 
County. The general pattern is better seen in Figure 3, 



Figure 3 -- PERCENT niSTRIBUTION OF THE POPULATION OF SURRY COUNTY BY AGE GROUPS, 1940-60-80, 



Percent o 1 r > I 




75H 



showing that the projected 1980 population will be greater 
over age 45, less under that age. The data are summarized 
in Table 12 for readability. The coming decade to 1970 
shows decreases in children under age 15 and among adults 
ages 30-44, but increases in young adults 15-29 (the 'baby 
boom') and over 45, 

Map 6 and Appendix E give total population projections 
for townships, but not for towns. A projection is normally 
made only for a stable area which is a complete and identifiable 
unit, such as a nation, state, or county. Any town is apt to 
change drastically by annexation, and any small area can 
completely reverse itself. For instance, a new large factory 
in Pilot Mountain could produce a great increase but this 
could be related and fit into a larger county trend, not one 
for the town. And planning in any town involves the organic 
whole, ignoring town limits. The slight decrease for Elkin 
Township may quite possibly Involve a slight gain by the 
Town through annexation, and the same could apply to the 
other towns. It is curious that although Elkin is the 
most affluent area with the highest living standard, a 
decrease is projected, but this is consistent with the 
employment trend projected by industry: the Town's services 
and new industry should thrive, but the huge employment in 
nongrowth industries would be expected to hold growth down 
to stability, as prelected . It may be doubted that the 
projected gains in rural mountain townships will actually 
occur, but the direction of past population trends shows 
such a gain. 



The important thing is not what sort of quantitative 
future that Surry will have, but what quality of people and 
of their style of life which Surry will have. Growth of indus- 
tries, of Jobs, of populat ion--may be good, but higher per 
capita incomes, higher education, better housing and private 
and public f ac i 1 i t i es--ar e even more desirable goals for the 
future . 



Table 


12 - 


- 


SUMMA 


RY OF SURRY COUNTY POPULATK 


DN 


, 1940-80, BY BROAD AGE 


GROUPS AND 












TOTALS BY 


RACE 






Age 




















G r ou p 








1940 


1950 




1960 


1970 


1980 


0-14 








14 ,381 


14,977 




15 , 184 


14 , 280 


14 , 235 


15-29 








12,326 


11 ,833 




10 , 384 


10, 826 


10 ,247 


30-44 








7 ,494 


9 , 136 




9 ,816 


8,681 


8 ,320 


45-59 








4 ,560 


5,716 




7 , 427 


8,641 


8 , 246 


60 + 








3.022 


3,931 




5 , 394 


7 , 165 


9 , 247 


TOTAL 








41 , 783 


45,593 




48 ,205 


49 . 593 


50 ,295 


— All 


whit 


es 




39 , 252 


42 , 985 




45 , 398 


46 , 599 


47,111 


--All 


nonw 


hi 


tes 


2 ,531 


2, 608 




2,807 


2 , 994 


3 , 184 


% nonwhi 


te 




6. 1% 


5.7% 




5.8% 


6 . 0% 


6.3% 



Percent Change by Age Group 



Age 
Group 

0-14 
15-29 
30-44 
45-49 

60 + 

TOTAL 

— A 1 1 wh i t e s 

— All nonwhites 



1940-50 


1950-60 


1960-70 


1970-80 


1960-80 


4. 1% 


1 .4% 


-6.0% 


-0.3% 


-6.3% 


-4 . 


-12.2 


4. 3 


-5.4 


-1.3 


21 . 9 


7 . 4 


-11 . 6 


-4 . 2 


-15.3 


25 . 4 


29 . 9 


16. 3 


-4. 6 


11.0 


30 . 1 


37 . 2 


32. 8 


29 . 1 


71 .4 


9 . 1% 


5 . 7% 


2.9% 


1 . 4% 


4. 3% 


9. 5 


5.6 


2.6 


1 . 1 


3. 8 


3. 


7.6 


6.7 


6. 3 


13. 4 



Census data for 1940-60. See Appendix F for projections source 



SURRY 
COUNTY 



MAP 6 



legend; 

'i^ii^ INCREASE OF 10.0% OR MORE 

]\\]\]', increase of 0.1-9.9% 
:::::: decrease 




PROJECTED POPULATION CHANGE 
I960 - 1980 



APPENDIX A -- 1960 EMPLOYMENT BY MAJOR INDUSTRY, FOR SURRY TOWNSHIPS 
(* indicates fewer than 10 employees) 



Jus 1 ness 









Furniture 


T 


ex t i les 


Machin- 


Other 


a 


Id 


Other 


Total 




Ae 


riculture 


Lumb e r 




Ap pa r e 1 


ery 


MfK. 


Professional** 


I 


adu s t r V 


Employment 


SURRY COUNTY TOTAL 


4,087 


983 


4 


, 970 


462 


887 


4 


295 


3 


„ 617 


19 


301 


B ryan 




209 


15 




112 


+ 


12 




77 




57 




486 


Dobson 




746 


16 




246 


40 


87 




264 




312 


1 


711 


Eldora 




324 


20 




99 


16 


68 




76 




58 




661 


Elkin TOWN 




* 


29 




490 


10 


32 




388 




263 


1 


221 


Rest of Elkin Tw 


p. 


124 


19 




348 


* 


28 




213 




213 




949 


Franklin 




121 


124 




127 


24 


12 




108 




61 




577 


Long Hill 




94 


+ 




51 


12 


16 




23 




37 




241 


Marsh 




207 


16 




86 





+ 




47 




35 




398 


Mt. Airy TOWN 




35 


204 




897 


93 


166 


1 


,037 




641 


3 


073 


Rest of Mt . Airy 


Twp 


347 


382 


1 


. 790 


176 


275 


1 


398 


1 


319 


5 


687 


Pilot Twp. 




198 


28 




192 


19 


33 




321 




2 75 


1 


066 


R o c k f o r d 




278 


+ 




58 


* 


49 




47 




37 




482 


Shoals 




204 


13 




59 





31 




31 




57 




395 


S i 1 oam 




162 


* 




12 


* 


* 




27 




33 




250 


S . Westf leld 




413 


15 




78 


* 







63 




80 




657 


Stewarts Creek 




247 


61 




219 


31 


47 




107 




73 




785 


Westfield 




369 


24 




106 


* 


20 




68 




66 




662 



Source: Unpublished U 



Census data 



** Finance, i n su ranc e, and real estate included in other industry 



Append! x B 



Methodologlt.il No 



The method of employment change analysis requires some 
explanation, In this case^ comp e titive change was obtained 
by multiplying the 1950 local employment in an industry by 
the national rate of growth for the decade, by sex, and the 
result was compared with the actual 1960 employment for the 
i ndus try. 

For example, in 1950 there were 1.310 Surry males and 
2,015 females employed in textiles; if the local industry had 
declined by 23.6% in jobs for males and 20.5% for females, as 
the national industry did, there would have been 1,001 resident 
male and 1,602 female workers by 1960; however, the actual 1960 
totals were 1,616 males and 2,825 females, or 'competitive gains' 
of jobs for 615 males and 1,223 females. The gains are not 
fictional, for competition in the industry is real and it is 
national. What happens in a Surry industry is largely determined 
by the condition of the national market, government policy, and 
the general economy, and not in a vacuum by a local manager or 
owner . 




emp 1 oymen t f 
5% if agricul 

g r ew at a fa 
s in Surry ha 

there would 
, 103 fewer m 
Surry is c red 

and 1,223 wo 
plains the -5 
e t i t i v e ga ins 
function of t 
to the size o 
o d . We have 
om 1950 and 1 
015 women in 
tional diff.er 
ecline, in thi 
r for the C ou 
es. it would 
king industry 
vat i ve ana ly s 

have a c omrao 



o r ma 
tur e 
s t e r 
d gro 
have 
en an 
ited 
men a 
12 an 
? Ob 
he gx. 
f the 
said 
960 a 
1950 . 
ences 
s cas 
n ty t 
hav e 
( in 
is he 
n- s en 



1 es 
is e 
rate 
wn a 
been 
d 70 
abov 
nd ' 
d -1 
vi ou 
owth 



expand 
xc lude 

it p r 
t the 

1,513 

fewer 
e with 
n^_t_ §^ 
,15 3 r 
sly, t 

r a t e 



ed by 6 

d : To 

omo ted 

na t i ona 

men an 

wome n 

c ompe t 

i_n£ ' of 

equi r ed 

his c om 

f err -the 



. 9% 
the 
r e la 
1 a V 
d 2 , 
than 
i t i V 

onl 

to 
pone 

nat 



in t 
ex t e 
five 
erag 
755 

the 
e ga 
y 10 
ba la 
n t o 
i ona 



he 
nt 

growth , 
e rate 
women 

ac t ua 1 
ins of 
3 and 
nee 

f i ndus- 
1 in- 



i ndus 

that t 

nd tha 

The 

be twe 
e ) and 
o ma i n 
to sec 
emp 1 oy 
re, a 1 
se rat 



try 
he t 
t th 
def i 
en t 
the 
tain 
ur e 
men t 
thou 
i ona 



in Sur r 
ex t i le 
e Surry 
cits of 
he nat i 
overa 1 
a net 
a large 
) . The 
gh not 
Is , 



y at 
indu 
ind 
-51 
ona 1 
1 na 
gain 
r an 
r ef o 
base 



the 
s t ry 
us t r 
2 an 

ind 
t i on 

i n 
d la 
r e , 
d on 



begi n- 
dec lined 

y employed 

d -1 , 153 , 

us t r y ' s 

al 

the 

r ge r 

the 
loca 1 



APPENDIX B -- ANALYSIS OF SURRY COUNTY EMPLOYMENT, 1950--60, INDUSTRY RELATIVE TO THE U.S. 



C h ange Due to Local Competitio n Change Due to Industry Growth 
Males Females Total Males Females Total 



All Manufacturing 

— Furn i t u r e 
— Mach i ne r y 

— Other Durables 
— Foods 
--Text i les 

— Appa re 1 

— Other Nondurables 

M i ning 

Cons t rue t i on 

Transp-Coramun-Util . 

Commerce 

Personal services 

Professional services 

All Others 



-95 


-10 


-105 


272 


137 


409 


92 


-20 


72 


130 


30 


160 


615 


1223 


1838 


-148 


251 


103 


136 


61 


197 


151 





151 


270 





270 


-18 


-13 


-31 


302 


190 


492 


1 


130 


131 


-72 


-154 


-226 


„_ 


-- 


-- 



-318 


-6 


-324 


9 


1 


10 


14 





14 


4 


-1 


3 


-512 


-1153 


-1665 


-48 


-40 


-88 


4 


-7 


-3 


-84 





-84 


-54 





-54 


-68 


-12 


-80 


-104 


-23 


-127 


-77 


-74 


-151 


106 


136 


242 


-30 


24 


-6 



Total Nonagr icul tural 



NET GAIN RELATIVE TO THE U.S 
-- Males 478 

-- Females 670 

-- Total 1148 



Source: Computations based on U. S. Census data. Table used in Mount Airy Population and 
Economy Report, 1962. 
— For explanation of computations, see the following page. 



APPENDIX C -- INCOME DATA FOR SURRY COUNTY BY TOWNSHIP, 1959 



Townshi p 



Per 
Ca p i ta 
I nc ome 



Fam i ly I nc ome 



Percent Distribution of 
Families by Income 



Under $3,000- 
$3,0 7,999 



$8 , 000 
and over 



SURRY COUNTY TOTAL 



1 , 197 $4 , 466 $3,7 17 



39 . I 



51.5% 



9 . 5% 



B ryan 

Dobson 

Eldora 

Elkin TOWN 

Rest of Elkin Twp . 

F r ankli n 

Long Hill 

Ma r sh 

Mt. Airy TOWN 

Rest of Mt . Airy Twp . 

Pilot Twp. 

Rockford 

Shoals 

S i loam 

S. Westfield 

S t ewar t s Creek 

Westf ield 





904 


3 


379 


2 


858 




922 


3 


613 


3 


325 




714 


3 


017 


2 


455 


2 


455 


7 


805 


5 


940 


1 


188 


4 


504 


3 


968 




850 


3 


188 


2 


694 




913 


3 


520 


3 


690 




826 


3 


289 


2 


371 


1 


773 


5 


871 


4 


504 


1 


075 


4 


201 


3 


844 


1 


, 357 


5 


040 


3 


683 




826 


3 


555 


2 


814 




858 


3 


585 


2 


750 




724 


2 


913 


2 


625 




864 


3 


347 


2 


662 




892 


3 


575 


3 


233 




964 


3 


959 


3 


094 



52.6 

44 . 2 

60 . 2 

12 . 1 

39 . 8 

56 , 

40 . 3 

57 . 5 
27,6 
34 . 7 
40 . 3 
54 . 
52. 
57 . 1 
56 . 5 
46 . 3 
48 . 6 



45 

51 , 

36 

57 

45 

39 



57.0 
38 . 4 



56 , 

59 , 

42 , 
39 



39 . 9 
42 . 9 
39 . 
48 . 7 
43.7 



1 . 8 
4 . 1 

2 . 9 
30 . 1 
14 . 7 

4 . 9 
2 . 7 

4 . 1 
16,0 

5 . 9 
16.8 

6 . 1 
8 . 1 



4 . 5 

5. 



Source: Unpublished U 



Census da ta , 



APPENDIX D 



1960 EDUCATION AND HOUSING DATA FOR TOWNSHIPS IN SURRY COUNTY 



Township 



Educational Attainment of Adults Ages 25- 
Median Percent Percent 
Years Under 12+ 
5 Year s Years 



Hous i ng 
Percent 
Subs tanda r d 



SURRY COUNTY TOTAL 



. 1 



17 



25,6% 



Bryan 


7 


6 


Dobson 


7 


6 


Eldora 


6 


6 


El kin TOWN 


12 


3 


Rest of Elkin Twp . 


7 


6 


F r anklin 


6 


9 


Long Hill 


7 


2 


Mar sh 


7 





Mt. Airy TOWN 


9 


4 


Rest of Mt. Airy Twp. 


7 


5 


Pilot Twp. 


9 





Rockf ord 


7 


7 


Shoals 


7 


6 


S i 1 oam 


7 


3 


S. Westfield 


7 


g 


S t ewar t s Creek 


7 


3 


Westfield 


9 


4 



20 . 9 

20 . 8 

29 . 2 

5 . 4 

14 . 6 

27 . 

8 . 1 

22 . 7 

13 . 7 

19 . 7 
11.6 
16.8 

20 . 7 
22 . 9 
22 . 6 
20 . 6 
13 . 5 



24, 
21, 
15, 
58, 
16, 
17, 
14, 
14, 
36, 
18, 
30, 
23, 
18, 
20 , 
28, 
17, 
27 , 



67 


8 


60 





68 


7 


12 


8 


49 


6 


72 


9 


53 


3 


72 


7 


26 


6 


51 


4 


48 





70 


4 


78 


9 


74 


6 


68 


2 


63 


1 


68 


5 



Source: Unpublished U. S. Census data. 



APPENDIX E 



POPULATION PROJECTIONS OF TOWNSHIPS IN SURRY COUNTY, 1950-80 



Township 


1950 


1960 


1970 


1980 


Percent 




















Change 




















1960-1980 


SURRY COUNTY: 


45 


593 


48 


205 


49 


593 


50 


295 


+ 4.3% 


Bryan 


1 


841 


1 


598 


1 


364 


1 


145 


-28 . 3 


Dobson 


4 


093 


4 


559 


4 


801 


4 


998 


+ 9.6 


Eldora 


1 


629 


1 


617 


1 


586 


1 


527 


- 5.6 


Elkin ( incl . Town) 


5 


181 


5 


160 


5 


056 


4 


865 


- 5.7 


F rankli n 


1 


329 


1 


654 


1 


829 


2 


056 


+ 24.3 


Long Hill 




505 




662 




693 




725 


+ 9.5 


Mar sh 


1 


072 


1 


157 


1 


189 


1 


223 


+ 5.7 


Mt. Airy (incl. Town) 


19 


383 


20 


704 


21 


759 


22 


448 


+ 8.4 


Pilot 


2 


590 


2 


601 


2 


618 


2 


606 


+ 0.2 


Rockford 


1 


244 


1 


141 


1 


029 




912 


-20. 1 


Shoals 


1 


170 


1 


093 


1 


004 




907 


-17 . 


S i loam 




832 




731 




633 




537 


-26. 5 


Stewarts Creek 


1 


871 


2 


483 


2 


750 


2 


920 


+ 17. 6 


Westfield and 




















S . Westfield 


2 


853 


3 


085 


3 


282 


3 


426 


+ 11 . 1 



1950 and 1960 from U.S. 
App end i X F . 



1970 and 1980 from computer projections. 



APPENDIX F 



POPULATION DISTRIBUTION BY AGE FOR SURRY COUNTY 
WITH PROJECTIONS TO 1980 





Census Da1j. 






Age 
Gr oup 


- 


P rn j ec 


t i o n s 


1940 




L950 




L960 


L970 




L980 


41 ,783 


45 


593 


48 


205 


TOTAL 


49 


593 


50 


295 


4 , 546 


5 


511 


4 


985 


0-4 


4 


941 


4 


868 


4 , 795 


4 


890 


5 


027 


5-9 


4 


661 


4 


730 


5 ,040 


4 


576 


5 


172 


10-14 


4 


678 


4 


637 


4,761 


4 


314 


4 


178 


15-19 


4 


295 


3 


985 


4,054 


3 


881 


3 


124 


20-24 


3 


548 


3 


202 


3 , 511 


3 


638 


3 


082 


25-29 


2 


983 


3 


060 


2, 865 


3 


366 


3 


382 


30-34 


2 


721 


3 


084 


2 ,550 


3 


167 


3 


216 


35-39 


2 


727 


2 


635 


2,079 


2 


603 


3 


218 


40-44 


3 


233 


2 


601 


1,824 


2 


274 


2 


930 


45-49 


2 


974 


2 


523 


1 ; 473 


1 


849 


2 


415 


50-54 


2 


985 


2 


999 


1 , 263 


1 


593 


2 


082 


55-59 


2 


682 


2 


724 


999 


1 


160 


1 


601 


60-64 


2 


086 


2 


581 


921 


1 


133 


1 


429 


65-66 


1 


866 


2 


404 


550 




762 


1 


007 


70-74 


1 


399 


1 


821 


552 




876 


1 


357 


75 + 


1 


814 


2 


441 



1940, 1950, and 1960 U. S. Census data. Projections for 
1970 and 1980 from IBM 650 computer program originated by 
Josef Perry, Division of Community Planning, and Dr. C. 
Horace Hamilton, North Carolina State College. All above 
data are summarized from more detailed race-sex breakdowns, 



STATE LIBRARY OF NORTH CAROLINA 
' ' 3 3091 00747 8993